1095 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94103
www.shapingsf.org/grant_bldg
grantbldg@yahoo.com
[in chronological order]
September 29, 2000
Next Meeting: Tuesday, October 3rd, 3 p.m. Café do Brasil (across Market from Grant Building)
Partial Victory Achieved
In response to pressure from the newly-organized Grant Building Tenants Association, the threatened rent increases that had been promised for November 1, 2000 have been postponed until January 15, 2001. A written commitment from the building owners is expected later today (Friday, September 29).
The Story So Far
With the news of imminent rent increases that we all received from Dan O'Leary and Elaine Hui, representing the Seligman Western Enterprises, various tenants of the Grant Building began organizing. On September 22, several met and founded the Grant Building Tenants Association. A letter (attached) was circulated among some of the building's tenants and sent by certified mail to the building managers. Additionally, a general meeting was called for Wednesday September 27 at 10 a.m. across Market Street at the Café do Brasil restaurant.
The meeting was attended by more than thirty Grant Building tenants. A general discussion of our predicament was held. We all expected that we would be receiving notice Friday September 29 of massive rent increases to take effect. Everyone agreed that we had to get a response before Friday to our letter requesting a moratorium on rent increases and the commencement of good faith negotiations between owners and tenants. We began designing our response and our internal structure, designating at least one tenant on each floor to act as contact person and distributor of news and memos for that floor. If you don't know who your contact is on your floor, please call one of the numbers above and find out.
After developing plans for a press conference, sign making and mobilizing our considerable resources in the communities we represent and in the press, we all left the restaurant and headed up to meet en masse with the building managers. They were out, but Elaine was returning in 15 minutes, so we left and regrouped on the 7th floor landing outside the elevators after a quarter hour. We went in to her office and demanded a response to our letter. We also demanded that she give us the name of the owner so we could contact that person directly.
Elaine first claimed to not know the owner, then that she didn't have his phone number. When pressed to give us his name, she wrote down the name of Oscar Schwartz, who she said was a representative of the owner. We left together, but as soon as we realized that the name we'd been given was not that of the actual owner we marched back in and demanded it again. By then she was on the phone with Oscar Schwartz, and reported to us that Dan O'Leary and Schwartz and the owner were on a conference call discussing our demands. Schwartz was overheard asking her about us "What are they doing?!?" as we stood in her office. "They won't leave until they get the owner's name and phone" she told him.
After she got off the phone, she told us they were discussing a response and she'd give it to us at 2 p.m. the same day (Wednesday). So we adjourned until then. Meanwhile, we ran off a flyer announcing an emergency meeting with the owners at 2 p.m. and gave it to every tenant.
At the appointed hour we reassembled, a similar 30 or so people, mostly the same folks who had been there in the morning, with a few missing and a few new ones on hand. We once again marched up to Elaine's office on the 8th floor. (Mary Ellen Churchill was videotaping the unfolding saga, with our permission having been asked for and granted at the earlier meeting in the morning. As we entered Elaine's office, she said she would not grant permission to be videotaped.)
Elaine let us all in, with additional tenants arriving every few minutes. She gave us the news that there would be no rent increases until January 15. We pressed her to give it to us in writing, and she promised she would do so later the same day (it has not appeared yet, and is now promised for later today Friday Sept. 29). She admitted, when asked, that probably this delay would not alter the owners' plans to raise rents by 300-400%. In essence, our situation is the same, but our first demand has been met, and we have a little breathing room.
The GBTA will meet again next Tuesday at 3 p.m. at Café do Brasil across Market Street from the Grant Building. We have proven again how important collective action is. We now need to stick together and make sure we avoid being pulled into individual negotiations regarding the upcoming rent increases. If we stick together, we should be able to manage slow, reasonable rent increases.
Join us if you haven't already. Our power lies in our unity.
October 4, 2000
EMERGENCY Meeting with building owners representatives: Friday, October 6th, 2 p.m. Suite 800
Owners Break Deal with Tenants!!!
Last week, on Wednesday, September 27, Elaine Hui, representing Seligman Western Enterprises, Ltd., informed an assembly of about 25 tenants of the Grant Building that the owners would hold off on any rent increases until January 15, 2001. There was also an agreement that a senior manager would fly in from Michigan to meet with the Grant Building Tenants Association this Thursday, October 5, to begin good-faith negotiations toward an amicable settlement of the many issues that the recent change of ownership entails.
Elaine Hui assured us that we would receive written confirmation of this agreement later that day (Wednesday, September 27) or, at the latest, the next day. During the course of the past several days various tenants approached Elaine Hui and Dan O'Leary for this written agreement and were told that "the lawyers" were still ironing out the details.
On Tuesday October 3 the Grant Building Tenants Association assembled at the Café do Brasil across Market St. at 3:00 p.m. After an hour-long discussion of our strategic and tactical options, a subcommittee of the general assembly proceeded together to Suite 800 to ask Dan O'Leary for a written agreement, as per the verbal agreement.
O'Leary stood in his doorway to address the subcommittee of eight tenants. During this conversation, he insisted that there was no deal, there hadn't been a deal, and that Elaine Hui had been acting on her own without owners' authorization when she made her promises to us. But we have the verbal agreement on tape, and it was witnessed by over 25 tenants. There is NO AMBIGUITY whatsoever about the fact that the owners agreed to the above points. Finally, we asked whether we could expect a written agreement the next day (Wednesday, October 3) and O'Leary said "maybe."
Five members of the association attended a meeting with Dan O'Leary and Elaine Hui today in their office. Dan O'Leary stated there was no deal, and also stated that the building owners were unwilling to meet with us. We were horrified to witness O'Leary humiliate Elaine Hui in front of us with his boorish response to her gracious and good-faith efforts to convey our concerns to the building owners. O'Leary did say that he might have more definite word for us this Friday, October 6.
Today's developments make it clear that the building owners and management are acting in bad faith. Our small businesses, agencies, and nonprofit organizations are at serious risk.
IT IS TIME TO TAKE UNITED ACTION TO FORCE THE OWNERS TO TREAT US WITH RESPECT!
October 6, 2000
EMERGENCY MEETING OFF!
A subcommittee will meet with building owners representatives today
Friday, October 6, 2 p.m., Suite 800
An Alternative Approach …
The Grant Building Tenants Association (GBTA) organized very quickly last week in the face of anxiety regarding our future in the building. Our livelihoods are at stake, threatened by the prospect of drastic rent increases.
We made our concerns known in the plainest possible terms to the local building management, representatives of Seligman Western Enterprises. We asked for a three-month moratorium of rent increases and the beginning of good-faith negotiations. This request was granted by a representative of the company--and then denied this week by that representative's superior.
Our outrage at this about-face was only natural.
But in our attempts to communicate with the building management we have discovered that Seligman Western Enterprises probably does not have a clear idea of what to do with the building or with us. At this point, we would like to calm the waters--and reinvite representatives of Seligman Western Enterprises to talk with representatives of the Grant Building Tenants Association..
To this end, a small GBTA delegation will attempt to meet with building management today at 2:00 p.m. to find out whether Seligman Western Enterprises has any response to our request for good-faith negotiations and to see whether the owners have fresh proposals to make to us to find a solution.
LET'S STAY COOL AND CALM AND TAKE THE TIME TO WORK THINGS OUT.
October 6, 2000
A smaller group from the Tenants Association met with Dan O'Leary at 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. He did not have the written agreement that we had asked for and he said that a written agreement would not be possible as long as Seligman Western was still trying to determine what kinds of improvements need to made at the Grant Building.
We did not demand the written agreement be produced immediately. We did ask that he communicate with us on a regular basis with regard to the Seligman's hazy intentions.
This meeting was considerably more relaxed than the meeting on Tuesday, October 3, which was conducted in a poisonous atmosphere. O'Leary did indicate in passing, that he did not foresee rents being increased this year. Of course, this is not a promise and only hindsight will tell us whether it is a prophecy.
We asked O'Leary to convey this message to his superiors:"What do you want? Do you wish to conduct negotiations, and if so, when might they begin?" We also reiterated our desire to have a meeting with Seligman management at City Hall. O'Leary said that he would convey this message to them.
On Tuesday the subcommittee will meet to discuss our strategy. Because there a differing perspectives on how to proceed, we want to help present these points of view to a general meeting. It is important to maintain a united front; it is also important that all views be heard and weighed by all concerned.
We are calling a general meeting for Wednesday, October 11, 3:00 p.m., at Café do Brasil (across the street from the Grant Building).
PLEASE COME TO THE GENERAL MEETING OCTOBER 11 TO EXPRESS YOUR VIEWS AND SHOW YOUR SOLIDARITY!
November 1, 2000
Since the flurry of activity in late September and early October, the Grant Building Tenants Association has not yet received any real information from the new owners. As reported in earlier communications, Dan O'Leary, representing the building owners Seligman Western Enterprises, Ltd., denied any deal had been struck between the Tenants Association and the owners. This in spite of 25 eyewitnesses and a videotape of the meeting between tenants and Elaine Hui, clearly acting as the owners' representative, in which a rent increase moratorium was promised as well as negotiations.
In any case, there have been no rent increases as yet, with the same old rents just arriving on bills for November. Facing the uncertainty, the Steering Committee of the Grant Building Tenants Association has been meeting weekly, trying to determine our best course of action and to forge and protect our unity. We resolved to continue to try to start negotiating with the Seligman group.
Yesterday, October 31, Dan O'Leary met with the Steering Committee (in attendance were Manny Alarcon, Chris Carlsson, Jim Brook, Mary Ellen Churchill, Bradley Angel, Dave Snyder, Peter Wiley). The meeting took place in a cordial atmosphere from 4:30 to almost 5:30. O'Leary was noncommittal when pressed for some kind of concrete promises. Nevertheless, our conversation did produce some new information from him. He conceded that the originally stated target rents were unachievable any time soon. They had visited the Sharon Building on New Montgomery where rents were around $3/foot, and he admitted that the Grant Building was considerably less desirable/valuable than the Sharon Bldg. on New Montgomery. While no specific dollar/foot numbers were declared for the new projected rents, it seems clear that the Seligmans are lowering their expectations to the $2/foot range, give or take a bit. He also stated the belief of the owners that they would have to work WITH the existing tenants as their plans become more clear. There's no question that they've been feeling the pressure of our organizing AND the pressure of the being in the spotlight as a "poster child" for the displacement issue. O'Leary did assure us that there would be no rent increases this year, and when notice was given that it would be more than 30 days (which he characterized as"just plain rude"). The only concrete quasi-promise we got from Dan O'Leary yesterday was that the owners would provide us with a range of possible rents/schedules, pending their evaluation of the renovation process and the seismic engineer's report, within 2 to 4 weeks. So we should have some idea of what might happen by Thanksgiving.
We made it clear that we felt the Seligmans could be much more forthcoming with some kind of concrete assurances to the existing tenants. We tried to establish that we were not oblivious to the situation from THEIR point of view, that is, they don't know what they're going to do, how much it's going to cost, how long it will take, what kind of flexibility they';ll need in terms of access to suites, empty floors, etc. But we also made it clear that our goal was to reach a workable agreement that gave us STABILITY, so we can get on with our businesses here in the Grant Building. We want to stay here and we want the rent increases to be reasonable and affordable, something which O'Leary acknowledged was a fact that the owners had to deal with. We stated our desire for multi-year leases at reasonable rents. No one took any hard line on any given issue, making it clear that we are ready and willing to negotiate rent increases, renovations and relocations, etc.
O'Leary let us know that the Seligmans have other properties in SF that they might be willing to let us move to temporarily if necessary, to accommodate renovations here. He also said they would SELL this building in an eyelash, IF they could find someone to buy at the price they paid, an unlikely scenario. He also said the Seligmans were in this for the long-term, and planned to acquire more buildings in San Francisco.
The Grant Building Tenants Association is continuing to press for negotiations towards the following basic points:
1. What is the current plan with respect to rent increases?
2. What is the current plan with respect to the schedule of implementation for rent increases?
3. What kinds of settlements are the Seligmans willing to offer by way of relocation expenses to those groups and individuals who cannot pay the new higher rents?
The Grant Building has been in the news lately. Most recently Supervisor Yaki met with Bradley Angel of Greenaction and Dave Snyder of the Bike Coalition in an effort to generate tenant support for his proposal to change zoning regulations for our stretch of Market Street to protect nonprofits. Of course, his proposal is far from being the law, and given his long-term commitment to Willie Brown and Brown's agenda, we have to greet anything he is doing with a great deal of skepticism. (Interestingly, Dan O'Leary met with Yaki just after Bradley and Dave did, and his report on his conversation with Yaki indicated that Yaki knew his proposed legislation would not be passed, and that it was seen more as a form of political pressure on mid-Market owners to enter negotiations with existing tenants.) Moreover, a zoning change to protect nonprofits does nothing to stabilize rents for existing small-budget organizations (what's to stop the Seligmans from filling up their building with the Red Cross or similarly big-budget nonprofits?), nor does it address the unique mix of nonprofits, independent writers and artists, and small businesses that are the tenants of this building.
Two other interesting tidbits from the Yaki talks: 1. Yaki told Bradley Angel that the Seligmans had called him, outraged over the zoning proposal, and said they'd be willing to"give a lot of money" … to whom or what wasn't clear. 2. Yaki told Bradley that the apparent quiescence of our Tenants Association over the past few weeks wasn't helping our cause… This is a curious comment from someone like Michael Yaki. Is he trying to manipulate us into making a big scene so he can step in front of it and claim that he's taking the lead to solve this real problem? He indicated that the folks at City Hall see us here in the Grant Building as a real powderkeg. It seems that if Yaki is trying to goad us into going more public, they must have a plan for isolating us and channeling our energy into their agenda. Clearly Yaki's real goal through all this is to serve his masters and help derail Prop L. A longer term goal of his might be getting positioned to be a broker on the new Board of Supervisors by distancing himself a bit from the Total Development All The Time agenda he's been consistently in support of until now.
On November 1, at 10:30 a.m., a rally was held at 965 Mission by the newly formed SOMA Against Displacement (SOMAD), attended by a half dozen Grant Building tenants. A number of other rallies are planned during the next couple of weeks (see below). Ongoing public pressure is key to keeping the heat on the Seligmans and the city government through the elections and beyond. There is a reasonable chance that the new city government will have several supervisors considerably more allied to our interests than the current Board. Regardless of the election outcome, our independent organizing and pressure has already led to a backing off by Seligman Western Enterprises until at least next year on rent increases. All indications are that when they do declare the rent increases, they will be lower than originally planned.
Chris Carlsson has put together a new area on the Shaping San Francisco website detailing the history of the Grant Building (with some cool historic pictures, the lobby murals, etc.), the flurry of memos and events since the Seligmans came in as new owners. It also has a list of Grant Building tenants, and if you give us any website you may have, we can link it to this site. You are encouraged to link your site to our Grant Building history site. The address is http://www.shapingsf.org/grant_bldg
December 18, 2000
Delegates from the GBTA Steering Committee met with Dan O'Leary of Seligman Western Enterprises last Friday, December 15, to receive his written proposal for the Grant Building tenants. Mr. O'Leary's document proposes:
* All the tenants who choose to stay in the Grant Building will be relocated to the first three floors, or maybe the 4th floor too. Floors 5-8 would be cleared for renovation.
* A so-called "2 year lease" with a cancellation clause available to Seligman or any tenant after the first six months, allowing for a 45 day notice. In other words, it's not really a lease at all, but a six month extension of our current status.
* Rents would be increased immediately to $2.50 per foot, plus 10 cents surcharge per foot for electricity, so a minimum of $2.60/ft. If you are in a suite on the Market Street front of the building, the rent would be $2.75 + $.10. In the second year of this so-called lease, it would raise to $2.75 for the bulk of the building, and $3.00 for the Market Street front.
This proposal has many shortcomings, but it is the first written proposal that Seligman Western Enterprises has made. The Steering Committee, with your support, will continue to negotiate to (greatly) improve upon this proposal.
Please come to the Steering Committee meeting 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, December 18, in Room 210, to discuss the pros and cons of the terms on offer.
January 2, 2001
Last Friday, December 28, a process server went around to offices and retail spaces in the Grant Building to post a "Thirty-Day Notice to Terminate Tenancy."
The Grant Building Tenants Association Steering Committee met today to discuss this document. We see the notice as (1) an extension of the January 15 date previously announced and (2) a bit of sabre-rattling by Seligman Western Enterprises to increase pressure on us all.
We're fine with having an extra two weeks in which to continue negotiating with the owner. And we are not impressed by language about "treble damages and attorney's fees." For the owner to be awarded anything, you would have to be sued and the court would have to make the award, and the owner would have to collect--after successfully evicting you by legal means.
We are far away from that scenario. The GBTA Steering Committee is engaged in serious negotiations with Dan O'Leary, the owner's representative, over the contents of his proposed "lease." If anything, the "Thirty-Day Notice" expresses the owner's nervousness, the owner's awareness that the clock he set in motion is ticking.
We are negotiating in good faith on behalf of the GBTA. If you would like to comment on the negotiations or the contents of the owner's proposal, please come to a Steering Committee meeting (held every Tuesday, 10:00 a.m., Suite 210). Or call Chris Carlsson (626-2160) or Karen Topakian (701-8707), or email ccarlsson@shapingsf.org, to relay your concerns or arrange to see a copy of the owner's proposal.
If you have not already signed up with the Grant Building Tenants Association, well, it's not too late! Drop by Suite 210 for more information.
The Grant Building Steering Committee.
IMPORTANT NEWS!
January 27, 2001
The attached documents were given to the Grant Building Tenants Association at the end of the day, Friday, January 26, by Dan O'Leary, representative of Seligman Western Enterprises, the owner of our building.
Included are a lease and maps of the second, third, and fourth floors. The proposed lease allows for multiyear leases (1-5 years) for tenants who remain or relocate to the lower floors. The maps indicate the proposed rents for each office on those floors--for the first year. Rents would increase in succeeding years. While we have gained the important concession of multiyear leases, the proposed rents still represent drastic increases over current levels.
Please read these documents carefully. We will be discussing our response to Dan O'Leary's proposal at our next meeting: Tuesday, Jan. 30, 10:00 a.m., Rm. 210. It is very important that you attend. (If you absolutely cannot attend, please contact someone on the Steering Committee.)
It is very important that we respond to Dan O'Leary's offer as a group. Leary intends to meet individually with tenants beginning Monday. If he contacts you, the proper response would be words to this effect:
"Thank you very much for the information. Yes, I'm interested in discussing the terms of the proposed lease. I will be meeting with the Tenants Association on Tuesday to discuss our response. I will get back to you soon after the meeting."
As you know from Dan's previous offer, described in the Steering Committee memo of Jan. 19, the building owner has changed his views about tenants remaining in the building. The proposed rents are indeed high, but the principle of long leases--and much else--is on the table.
Our long, hard efforts to build the Grant Building Tenants Association have produced good results for us so far. Now that discussions are concrete, it is more important than ever that we remain unified and respond as a group.